Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-03-26-Speech-3-151"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2003-03-26"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Restrictions on the marketing and use of nonylphenol, nonylphenol ethoxylate and cement2
dcterms:Language	"pt"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20030326.9.3-151"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2003-03-26-Speech-3-1522
lpv:speaker	lp:José Ribeiro E Castro2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Committee on Citizens' Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 member; UEN (1999-11-17--2004-07-19)3 substitute; AFCO (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 member; Members from the European Parliament to the Joint Parliamentary Assembly of the Agreement between the African, Caribbean and Pacific States and the European Union (ACP-EU) (2002-02-06--2004-07-19)3 unknown; Partido Popular (1999-11-17--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, this proposal for a directive has set ambitious aims for itself: to protect health and the environment. We can readily agree with the proposal and the rapporteur with regard to the care that needs to be taken with nonylphenol and with nonylphenol ethoxylate, the dangers of which are well known and which cannot be addressed by any means other than a proposal for a directive. We have serious reservations, however, about the need and the appropriateness of the directive on cement, on various grounds. Firstly, we believe it to be technically wrong and politically surprising that the same legislative text covers both unquestionably dangerous products and cement. Secondly, we believe that clearly insufficient time has elapsed since the implementation of directive 2001/60/EEC on labelling to be able to draw safe conclusions about its adequacy or otherwise in reducing or eliminating the most worrying cases in this field. Thirdly, the information available does not enable us to corroborate, with the apparent certainty that some Members have, a genuine and rigorous risk assessment of chromium VI, which, as we know, is still a cause for controversy amongst specialists. Lastly, if these limitations are adopted, we feel that to some extent we will have accepted a form of discrimination which, by means of derogations, favours producers and the bulk cement trade over bagged cement. We are therefore opposed in particular to Amendments Nos 31, 32, 33, 34 and 43, and if these are adopted we shall, unfortunately, feel obliged to vote against the report."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph